Education Minister Jan Tinetti has been referred to Parliament’s Privileges Committee by the Speaker and could be found in contempt of Parliament after she failed to correct a false statement she made in the House quickly enough.

Tinetti would be the first MP in 15 years to be found in contempt of Parliament. The most recent was Winston Peters.

The issue at the heart of the matter is that Tinetti told the House in February that she had no responsibility for the release of school attendance data.

She was told later that day by staff that this was an error, but only corrected the record on May 2 - 14 sitting days later. Parliament sat on February 23, when Tinetti could have corrected the answer.

Speaker Adrian Rurawhe told Parliament today he had referred the question to the Privileges Committee.

He said that a complaint had alleged that Tinetti had “deliberately misled the House by failing to correct a misleading statement at the earliest opportunity.

“It is an important principle that the House can trust the accuracy of ministerial replies to Parliamentary questions,” Rurawhe said.

When correcting the answer earlier this month, Tinetti said she “subsequently became aware that my office did have input into the timing of the release of the data”, but did not say that this had been brought to her attention the very same day she made the incorrect statement.

 “While mistakes are sometimes made which can result in the House receiving a misleading statement it is vitally important that as soon as this is discovered the minister returns to the House to correct their answer at their earliest opportunity,” Rurawhe said.

He said Tinetti did not think she needed to correct the answer in the House until she received a letter from Rurawhe on May 1 telling her that she did.

Rurawhe said the issue raised a potential matter of contempt, and the Privileges Committee would determine whether the delay would amount to contempt.

“It is for the Privileges Committee to determine whether the delay in correcting an inaccurate statement in this instance amounts to contempt. I rule that a question of privilege does arrive from the time taken to correct a misleading statement to the House. The question therefore stands referred to the Privileges Committee.”

In 2008, Winston Peters was referred to the Privileges Committee over whether he should have declared a $100,000 donation from businessman Owen Glenn in 2005 towards his legal costs.

The committee recommended a censure motion, which the House later voted on and passed.